Talmud for Nedarim 11:8

הַמֻּדָּר הֲנָאָה מֵחֲתָנוֹ וְהוּא רוֹצֶה לָתֵת לְבִתּוֹ מָעוֹת, אוֹמֵר לָהּ, הֲרֵי הַמָּעוֹת הָאֵלּוּ נְתוּנִים לָךְ בְּמַתָּנָה וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא לְבַעְלֵךְ רְשׁוּת בָּהֶן, אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁאַתְּ נוֹשֵׂאת וְנוֹתֶנֶת בְּפִיךְ:

If one's son-in-law had bevowed benefit from him, and he (the father-in-law) wished to give money to his daughter, he says to her: "Take this money as a gift, on condition that your husband has no right to it, but only in what you buy and put in your mouth." [And his condition stands, and the husband does not acquire it. And even though, by means of this gift, he "rescues" him from exertion; for his wife is fed by this money, and feeding her was his obligation — "saving from exertion" is not considered "benefitting."]

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

HALAKHAH: “A woman who had made a vow of nazir,” etc. Does this mean it became holy by dedication⁷³Since in the absence of a contract to the opposite, all property of the wife’s is administered by her husband, how can the wife dedicate animals for her sacrifices without asking her husband to do it for her?? But if a third person gave her a gift and said, on condition that your husband have no right of disposition over it⁷⁴This is one scenario in which the husband has no say in what she does. (Cf. Nedarim 11:8, Notes 69–70; Babli 24b.), then it is hers. Rebbi Mattaniah said, if he gave her power over his properties⁷⁵The husband gives her the right to sign for everything concerning their properties. In this case, she is able to dedicate the animals but he retains veto power. In the scenario described in Note 63, he has no veto power.. If he comes to protest, it did not become holy; otherwise, it became holy.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse